Purchase a PDF
How does it work?
- Select the purchase option.
-
Check out using a credit card or bank account with
PayPal . - Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.
The article reviews the research on teacher effectiveness and develops the case for a model of teacher effectiveness in which differential effectiveness is incorporated. Five problems with current concepts of teacher effectiveness are identified: undue influence of available techniques upon the concept; emphasis on school, to the detriment of teacher, effectiveness; tenuous relationship to teacher improvement; narrowness of operational definitions in research; and the development of generic, rather than differentiated, models. In addition the failure of existing models to explain variance in pupil outcome at the classroom level, the neglect of teacher self-evaluation, and the restricted measures of pupil outcomes are noted. A differential model is proposed incorporating five dimensions of difference. These refer to teacher activity, outside as well as inside the classroom; curriculum subject; pupil background factors; pupil personal characteristics; cultural and organisational contexts of teaching. The developmental functions of such a model for research and for teacher appraisal are explored. Four problems for implementing a differentiated model are raised: complexity, stakeholder expectations, values, and policy acceptability. These are considered in the light of the controversial Hay McBer model in England and of models developed in Europe and the USA in the early decades of the last century.
The object of the Oxford Review of Education is to advance the study of education. It especially wishes to promote the elaboration and evaluation of a body of speculative and empirical theory, the development of which might improve educational practice. The journal publishes papers on the theory and practice of education from scholars throughout the world in a variety of disciplines: philosophy, political science, economics, history, anthropology, sociology, psychology and medicine. The Editorial Board seeks to provide a common forum and, on occasion, a focal point of controversy for the discussion of research findings, of historical and contemporary issues and of the functioning of educational institutions.
Building on two centuries' experience, Taylor & Francis has grown rapidlyover the last two decades to become a leading international academic publisher.The Group publishes over 800 journals and over 1,800 new books each year, coveringa wide variety of subject areas and incorporating the journal imprints of Routledge,Carfax, Spon Press, Psychology Press, Martin Dunitz, and Taylor & Francis.Taylor & Francis is fully committed to the publication and dissemination of scholarly information of the highest quality, and today this remains the primary goal.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Oxford Review of Education
© 2003 Taylor & Francis, Ltd.